John Boehner’s Tuesday task: Selling GOP on tax hike

Tuesday could be the most important day of the fiscal cliff talks so far: Speaker John Boehner will have to pitch a tax increase to his conservative troops.

The Ohio Republican is set to brief the House GOP Conference on the status of his closely held negotiations with President Barack Obama since conceding an increase on tax rates for millionaires, a risky move by the speaker. Boehner is not going to present a deal to the conference, but their reaction to his briefing will go a long way in determining whether Boehner can strike a deal with the White House to avert the fiscal cliff and put the nation on more solid fiscal footing.

Fiscal deal close? (POLITICO LIVE)

Fiscal cliff: A primer

Even with the quickening pace of negotiations, it seems likely that negotiations will push close to New Year’s Eve.

Boehner’s bottom line, according to Republican sources: Obama needs to agree to a deal that cuts $1 in spending for every dollar raised in taxes. The White House hasn’t moved enough toward that goal, sources said Monday.

Obama’s counteroffer on Monday to Boehner, according to a source familiar with the negotiations, was allowing tax rates to increase for all Americans making more than $400,000 annually. Obama had previously said that he wanted $250,000 as the cutoff point for extending the current Bush tax rates.

Overall, Obama is seeking $1.2 trillion in new revenue, and he’s offering $1.22 trillion in spending cuts, according to this source.

Other details include: $400 billion in cuts from federal health programs, an additional $200 billion from other non-health entitlement programs; $200 billion in discretionary spending cuts, with half coming from the Pentagon; “fast-track process” for corporate and individual tax reform in 2013; a “permanent doc fix” and middle-class exemption from the Alternative Minimum Tax; sequestration “turned off for select areas” as part of enforcement trigger; $50 billion for infrastructure spending; $30 billion to extend federal unemployment benefits; and potentially most important, a two-year boost in the debt ceiling with “periodic McConnell mechanism votes.” That final item refers to the procedure agreed to as part the 2011 debt-ceiling compromise that increases the U.S. government’s borrowing authority automatically unless Congress votes to disapprove it.

The source said it wasn’t the final offer from Obama, but it demonstrates that the president is bargaining in good faith and has revised his demands in order to try to reach a deal with Boehner. This source said Obama’s proposed spending cuts amount to $2.4 trillion in total reductions during the last two years, when those locked in as part of the 2011 Budget Control Act are included. In addition, the White House is claiming much as $4 trillion in budgetary savings from ending the Iraq war while also drawing down American combat forces in Afghanistan, savings that GOP leaders refuse to acknowledge.

Yet, Obama and Boehner remain a long way off on tax rates and who will pay those higher taxes in 2013. GOP aides said Monday night that their analysis of the Obama offer shows the president actually wants $1.3 trillion in new revenue, with only $850 billion in spending cuts. Boehner has already rejected this offer, although the two sides are still talking.

Boehner, for his part, already has to go in front of skeptical House Republicans on Tuesday who don’t want any tax increase at all.

Yet, Boehner is making a cold political calculation. It’s risky for him to raise taxes, but he’s already got backing on it from dozens of other Republicans. Times have changed, Boehner thinks, and if he could slash the federal govenment’s $1 trillion-plus annual deficit, higher taxes on rich folks is the right trade-off to make.

Still, as Boehner ambles into HC-5 — a Capitol basement room where he’s had come-to-Jesus moments like this before with his colleagues — he’ll be taking a gamble that no Republican speaker has tried in years.

Has Boehner ever managed to get the tea party caucus to go along with him on any of his previous attempts at deal-making? The current House session has accomplished absolutely nothing since 2010 - why should they start now?

Poor Boehner. He's desperate for a deal. He know he's in trouble whether he cut a deal or not. The vulture are circling his red caucus. He need to watch his back from that little weasel (Kantor) ready to jump into the Speaker job.

It bewilders me that Republican leaders balk over providing financial help to the struggling majority in our country.

So Republicans want to raise the retirement age, despite the hardship this change would cause. And they want to decrease Social Security payments, even though the average income of retired citizens is less than $25,000.00 per year.

The pledge of allegiance not to raise any tax even prevents Republican leaders from raising the cap on income contributions toward Social Security, as has been done in the past. Their allegiance is NOT to the nation and the well-being of citizens.

I think that all Republican leaders who pledged allegiance to Grover Norquist must be excluded from negotiations. Their allegiance to the Grover Norquist pledge forces them to favor austerity measures, that will have negative outcomes such as we witness in European countries. Needed is relief for the dwindling middle class, and a focus on job development.

I know that conservatives on here always argue whenever there is talk of tax increases but as a Republican myself I think you have to deal if you wants cuts. I personally think we should do away with all income tax credits as they are nothing but welfare to the masses.

Republicans like Jordan, Chocola, Norquist and so many others are brain-dead. They continually beat a dead horse and expect to win the race. They need to drop the stupid idea that giving huge tax windfalls to the wealthy creates job growth. It doesn't and is likely to do the opposite. Bush gave them (and himself) their big tax cuts and they pocketed the money and went out created squat jobs -- the worst job creation numbers in modern presidential history. You need to raise the tax rates on the rich if you want to get them off their keesters and actively looking to make more money. Cutting spending is not the problem most urgent; as Keynes said, growing jobs by infusing the economy with money (= demand) creates the jobs we need to nurture and goose our economic recovery. Republicans know they are lying on this issue, which is why they do their best John Maynard Keynes impersonation when the talk moves to cutting spending in the defense sector.

"It demonstrates that the president is bargaining in good faith and has revised his demands in order to try to reach a deal with Boehner." (Politico)

Maybe good faith with Boehner, but it shows President Obama is negotiating in bad faith with our country. We need the revenue. You don't give revenue raised on the richest away that is already won; it's money in the bank. Possibly the weakest and worst negotiator in presidential history, Obama had only to wait until January 1st. All he had to do was keep his give-them- everything hands OFF what we have already won. Obama is showing he's no more serious about getting our country out of the hole justly than Republicans are. Like them, he's about coddling the wealthy at the expense of the rest of US. Notice that Obama's new cut-off on rate hikes is at $400,000 per year, just what he makes. Gotta protect those poor people struggling to make it on $400,000 a year! He's no better than Bush, who saw to it that he gave himself an unneeded tax cut we have to borrow money from China to pay for.

This is real simple all Mr. Boehner has to do is go to his people and say in 2 weeks the taxes for all people go up no matter what is going on then we look like the IDIOTS that we are if we cannot come to some agreement in our party. The country will take it out on us in the next election. If we make it 400,000 and up we save some people and all of us but make sure that from now on when you make some extra money make sure it is in cash so you donot have to pay taxes on it. Remember we all hear in the congress make around 500,000 dollars a year do you want the american people to make us pizza delivery guys again like Jow walsh and and Col. WEst and Mr akin?

Earth to the GOP (which is getting increasingly smaaaalller in my rearview mirror.) Take a business card out of your pocket, and pinch it tightly between your thumb and index finger. The space between your fingers represents how close you are to creating a 3rd party--maybe the TeaParty? Principled people like me have HAD IT with UNprincipled politicians!

Ask yourself these very simple questions:

1. What % of the national debt is caused by insufficient tax revenues? The answer is 0%.

2. What % of the national debt is caused by runaway government spending? The answer is 100%.

With these facts in mind, why would you EVER raise taxes on the people who already pay the lion's share of the taxes? DO NOT MEET THIS MARXIST GANGSTER HALFWAY!!!!!!! By doing so, you cede the argument that the problem is the rich who "aren't paying their fair share." We all know that dishonest narrative belongs to the left, and it's a bold-faced lie. So, WHY would you do it? Why raise taxes on the "rich"?

Right now, over 48% of all workers pay NO federal income tax. Is it all right in your mind to have that many riding for free? If so, explain to me why ANY person of able body and able mind should be totally free from supporting the United States government.

To the GOP, you are on notice. You are so close to splitting the GOP forever by reaching across the aisle to this Marxist Gangster! If you read this comment, you've been warned!

If Boehner hasn't already destroyed his own position in the House with his ill-founded actions then the miserably incompetent House is functioning as board of directors for the entire criminal enterprise that is based in Washington.

LET'S GO OFF THE CLIFF THEN SO THESE BOZOS WILL MAINTAIN THEIR "CONSERVATIVE PRINCIPLES." Boehner's so-called concession is not enough--it is an eye wash to make him appear to have conceded something.

OBAMA CAMPAINED AND WON ON RAISING TAXES FOR THOSE EARNING MORE THAN $250,000, NOT $1,000,000.

OBAMA, BY THE LATEST COUNT, NOW HAS A WHOPPER OF A MANDATE—he won the election by almost 4% point, not by about 2% point as previously estimated. But Republicans in Washington are still trying to control the agenda, as if the election never happened. I hope Obama will stand tall this time and carry out the mandate the American people gave him! He should never allow Boehner, Ryan and Cantor to try to implement Romney's campaign agenda.

Obama is likely going to "over-reach" and demand that Boehner try to sell a deal that can't be sold to Republicans. And that will bring this "compromise" to failure. It is really too bad, because there is a compromise available. But Obama wants Republicans scalps in a clear political victory that has nothing to do with the fiscal crisis we find ourselves in.

The Democrats actually hope a deal won't be reached. They will get much more money if the Bush tax cuts expire for everyone, and if Defense is cut 50%. A LOT more, and they can smell it like a bloodhound in heat. If anything attracts Democrats, it's taxpayer money--they are on it like ants on sugar.

The Democrats actually hope a deal won't be reached. They will get much more money if the Bush tax cuts expire for everyone, and if Defense is cut 50%. A LOT more, and they can smell it like a bloodhound in heat. If anything attracts Democrats, it's taxpayer money--they are on it like ants on sugar.

Look at the history of federal deficits - Republican administrations have a record at least as bad.

Good faith on both sides will get us a deal. Fairy tales about our political system (and history) won't. Plenty of Democrats and Republicans would like a deal... but much of the debate is poisoned by the uninformed hypocrisy of claims like this one.

One of the items Obama is pushing in this deal is to "save" money by instituting "a less generous interpretation of inflation" across government programs. What that means is that the cost-of-living adjustment will be scaled back for senior citizens.

For 2012 the inflation rate is estimated to be 8%. The cost-of-living adjustment is 1.8%. That means that for every senior citizen on social security, they have lost more than 6% of their buying power in the last year. And that loss of buying power will accelerate year by year.

Is it any surprise to anyone that now that he is safely elected, he is perfectly willing to throw senior citizens over the cliff? Well, not to conservatives. We've been well aware of what a sleaze this incompetent bumbler is.

But - that's what all those senior citizens who voted for him said that they wanted when they put him back in for another term. Well, now you've got it. Enjoy it. At least you can still get deals on dog food. With inflation going up the way it is, and the CPI not adjusting for it, dog food may become the main course for many seniors.

I am soooo tired of hypocritical self-righteousness on these boards... but I'm like an addict, coming back for more. I keep (foolishly) thinking there's a reasoned debate to be had.

================================================

That was a meaningless bill. It lacked any enforcement mechanism (how do you determine if a company moved jobs overseas or simply invested overseas?) and it created a HUGE loophole for corporations to get massive tax subsidies for doing basically nothing! We don't need to be feathering the next of big corporations (the only ones who would benefit from thuis law) and permitting them to give rich CEOs a big bonus for claiming that he "returned jobs from overseas"!

All that bill did was crete a whole new bureacracy to monitor something it could not control. It may have looked goo don paper to "bring jobs back to the US", but it was simply another tax and spendsing bill that would have been impossible to enforce and would merely grow government.

This is surreal how Politico reports things. Boehner has to persuade the house to accept tax rate hikes????

The current law is that there are going to be tax hikes for all. Anything Boehner does to mitigate the damage is a good thing and should be pretty easy to sell.

============================

Not unless he gets cuts as well. The Obama Admin wants the tax increases, but also wants to have spending increases. That simply won't happen. We need spending cuts. If Obama and the Dems agree to cut enough, the Republcians are will to raise taxes. That is what is called "balance". So far, Obama has not offered any "balance".